Who are Mitt Romney's 47 percent? A breakdown

[Texas_tea]

No, I'm not "back." I am dropping in as I wish, but there really is no reason for me to be an integral part of a forum that is so skewed and so biased in the treatment of its members based on partisanship alone.

I do agree with you that too many people will not vote and others are misguided. . . too many Fox News addicts are the prime exemple!

Welcome "not back" Openmind. It's good to see your comments again. I'm sorry you feel the site is so skewed and so biased in the treatment of its members based on partisanship alone. There actually have been some great cordial debates lately.

However, I feel this Country is so divided at this point that "most" debate is irrelevant because I think the majority of the Country has already made up their mind on the coming election, and no story or possibly even an event will change the minds of either side.

This Country is at a fundamental crossroads. Most are very clear on their opinions on which way they would like to see this Country proceed. Partisanship? Yes ... maybe but, that would be because the directions in which we will proceed are clearly opposites.

While I will agree some voters are "misguided" I believe most are informed and clear on at least how they feel. I also want to believe that there will be a massive turn-out of voters, simply because the directions at stake are so different. This isn't a Clinton/Bush difference. This is a historical fundamental change for this Country.

And, again, while I will agree there certainly are a lot of Fox News addicts here, there is also many who do not believe anything the MSM is reporting with good reason. That doesn't necessarily make the Fox News Addicts, maybe more like simple distrust of our MSM in this Country.

Anyway, as I stated above, it's good to see your comments again. I hope you drop in often .... as you wish of course.

 

[Openmind]

Welcome "not back" Openmind. It's good to see your comments again. I'm sorry you feel the site is so skewed and so biased in the treatment of its members based on partisanship alone. There actually have been some great cordial debates lately.

However, I feel this Country is so divided at this point that "most" debate is irrelevant because I think the majority of the Country has already made up their mind on the coming election, and no story or possibly even an event will change the minds of either side.

This Country is at a fundamental crossroads. Most are very clear on their opinions on which way they would like to see this Country proceed. Partisanship? Yes ... maybe but, that would be because the directions in which we will proceed are clearly opposites.

While I will agree some voters are "misguided" I believe most are informed and clear on at least how they feel. I also want to believe that there will be a massive turn-out of voters, simply because the directions at stake are so different. This isn't a Clinton/Bush difference. This is a historical fundamental change for this Country.

And, again, while I will agree there certainly are a lot of Fox News addicts here, there is also many who do not believe anything the MSM is reporting with good reason. That doesn't necessarily make the Fox News Addicts, maybe more like simple distrust of our MSM in this Country.

Anyway, as I stated above, it's good to see your comments again. I hope you drop in often .... as you wish of course.

Thanks for your kind words, and I do agree with you.
I believe that the two paths are very clear. . .and that people who have a little more exposure to the "outside" world rather than JUST America realize that one of those paths will leave America behind the rest of the world in many aspects (including technology, environment, infra structure, and social wellness) while the other will move America forward to regain our ability to compete with the rest of the world and to regain our place as REAL leaders, rather than bullies.

Having just come back from a 11 weeks vacation throughout Europe, I realize that we, as a country, are the ONLY ones not realizing that.

 

[Texas_tea]

while the other will move America forward to regain our ability to compete with the rest of the world and to regain our place as REAL leaders

I am sure that most responsible voters want this for the US. I agree the question at stake here will be which direction to go.

Some believe that America needs to return to its Foundings, the very style of government that made us a successful super power, promoting more human rights, Freedom and Liberties than any other country, at any other point in history of the planet.

Others believe that a more European model will achieve this. This is the fundamental difference. And, again, I believe the far majority of Americans have already made up their minds one way or the other on how to achieve this goal.

 

[Openmind]

I am sure that most responsible voters want this for the US. I agree the question at stake here will be which direction to go.

Some believe that America needs to return to its Foundings, the very style of government that made us a successful super power, promoting more human rights, Freedom and Liberties than any other country, at any other point in history of the planet.

Others believe that a more European model will achieve this. This is the fundamental difference. And, again, I believe the far majority of Americans have already made up their minds one way or the other on how to achieve this goal.

Yes, once again I agree.
However, what some who want "to return to American's Foundings" forget is that the world today is no longer what it was 250 years ago. . .that other world leaders have emerged, that the rest of the world is moving FORWARD and has kicked our butt in the last 10 years in more ways than one.
IF we could totally isolate ourselves from the world economy, from the world influence, from the world's shrinking due to communications and ease of travel, we COULD possibly succeed in using the same fundamental that "made us a successful super power." However, we CAN'T, not with our greed for power, our greed for being the "leaders" our greed for oil, our desire to benefit from every new technology and discovery that happen today all over the world.

Just as most Americans would agree that they can't use the same transportation or energy fundamental that they did under our founders, and that the running of a city like New York today takes a very different aspect and "style of government" that it did in 1776, we must look at the "foundings" established by our forbearers in the way they intended them to be, and that is a LIVING, growing, changing, adapting document, that moves with the needs of the time and the context of America in the world.

One only has to look at our infrastructure, and compare it to that of China or Europe to understand that, IF we want to regain our lead (or even remain in the running), we MUST adjust to today's world.

http://www.economist.com/node/18620944

. . .modern America is stingier. Total public spending on transport and water infrastructure has fallen steadily since the 1960s and now stands at 2.4% of GDP. Europe, by contrast, invests 5% of GDP in its infrastructure, while China is racing into the future at 9%. America's spending as a share of GDP has not come close to European levels for over 50 years. Over that time funds for both capital investments and operations and maintenance have steadily dropped.

 

[Texas_tea]

Yes, once again I agree.
However, what some who want "to return to American's Foundings" forget is that the world today is no longer what it was 250 years ago. . .that other world leaders have emerged, that the rest of the world is moving FORWARD and has kicked our butt in the last 10 years in more ways than one.

Of course the world is not what it was 250 years ago. The world isn't what is was 50 years ago. But, that does not in any way suggest that the Constitution should be discarded. There are, of course Constitutional Amendments. The Constitution was successfully amended in 1920 with the 19th Amendment as attitudes changed in this country with the Women's Suffrage Movement.

The Constitution was proven to be successful again in 1964 with clarification of the 14th and 15th Amendments during the Civil Rights Act of 1964 just to name a couple. The Constitution is the most relevant and successful document in the history of the world. No other country, not even much older countries can even come closed to it's success throughout history.

Returning to our Foundings in no way suggest going backwards or not moving "Forward". The problem is not the Constitution or our Founding form of government. The problem is "our government", our politicians and how they have distorted and illegally ignored the Constitution. Returning to our Founding means returning to smaller Constitutional government.

The alternative of scrapping the Constitution and continuing with out of control growing government only not only destroy our economy and way of life but also the economy of many other countries as well. This is the failed government of history and there is literally centuries of data to reflect this. Americans who understand this do not believe this is a path for success for America or anyone else on this planet.

IF we could totally isolate ourselves from the world economy, from the world influence, from the world's shrinking due to communications and ease of travel, we COULD possibly succeed in using the same fundamental that "made us a successful super power." However, we CAN'T, not with our greed for power, our greed for being the "leaders" our greed for oil, our desire to benefit from every new technology and discovery that happen today all over the world.

We were no more isolated then than we are now. Bigger, yes ... isolated no. We absolutely can "succeed in using the same fundamental that "made us a successful super power" but not unless we have a responsible government that upholds their oath to obey and protect the Constitution.

While I agree that we have a greed for power (with our politicians) in this country by the very comments I made above and that yes that is a problem, please explain to me our "greed for oil." There is no alternative at this time. Is it greedy that someone wants to use oil for transportation to work and support their family? Is it greed that someone would want to use oil to heat their homes and protect their families?

Please explain our "greed" for being the "leaders." America is the most successful country in the world. That does not make us greedy and it has certainly made many other nations successful as well, not only by economical means but human rights as well.

America is not a greedy nation that stole all it's wealth from third world countries and should be apologizing around the globe for our success. America currently has an out of control government whose actions threaten our economy, our way of life, our Freedom and Liberties, the Freedom and Liberties and economies of many other nations as well.

The only path of success for America and the rest of the world is to downsize our government and return back to smaller Constitutional government and end the current trend of out of control, ever encroaching, Constitution violating government.

 

[dogtowner]

Of course the world is not what it was 250 years ago. The world isn't what is was 50 years ago. But, that does not in any way suggest that the Constitution should be discarded. There are, of course Constitutional Amendments. The Constitution was successfully amended in 1920 with the 19th Amendment as attitudes changed in this country with the Women's Suffrage Movement.

Open doesn't comprehend that that you are referring to principle over fads nor does she comprehend the freedom you describe.

 

[Texas_tea]

Open doesn't comprehend that that you are referring to principle over fads nor does she comprehend the freedom you describe.

What I have so much trouble "comprehending" is how anyone can look at our current situation and reasonably understand how and why we are in the situation and then think more government, more regulations, the forfeiting of more Freedoms and Liberties could in any way solve anything.

Government is the problem not the solution. The only solution is limited government!

 

[Openmind]

Of course the world is not what it was 250 years ago. The world isn't what is was 50 years ago. But, that does not in any way suggest that the Constitution should be discarded. There are, of course Constitutional Amendments. The Constitution was successfully amended in 1920 with the 19th Amendment as attitudes changed in this country with the Women's Suffrage Movement.

The Constitution was proven to be successful again in 1964 with clarification of the 14th and 15th Amendments during the Civil Rights Act of 1964 just to name a couple. The Constitution is the most relevant and successful document in the history of the world. No other country, not even much older countries can even come closed to it's success throughout history.

Returning to our Foundings in no way suggest going backwards or not moving "Forward". The problem is not the Constitution or our Founding form of government. The problem is "our government", our politicians and how they have distorted and illegally ignored the Constitution. Returning to our Founding means returning to smaller Constitutional government.

The alternative of scrapping the Constitution and continuing with out of control growing government only not only destroy our economy and way of life but also the economy of many other countries as well. This is the failed government of history and there is literally centuries of data to reflect this. Americans who understand this do not believe this is a path for success for America or anyone else on this planet.



We were no more isolated then than we are now. Bigger, yes ... isolated no. We absolutely can "succeed in using the same fundamental that "made us a successful super power" but not unless we have a responsible government that upholds their oath to obey and protect the Constitution.

While I agree that we have a greed for power (with our politicians) in this country by the very comments I made above and that yes that is a problem, please explain to me our "greed for oil." There is no alternative at this time. Is it greedy that someone wants to use oil for transportation to work and support their family? Is it greed that someone would want to use oil to heat their homes and protect their families?

Please explain our "greed" for being the "leaders." America is the most successful country in the world. That does not make us greedy and it has certainly made many other nations successful as well, not only by economical means but human rights as well.

America is not a greedy nation that stole all it's wealth from third world countries and should be apologizing around the globe for our success. America currently has an out of control government whose actions threaten our economy, our way of life, our Freedom and Liberties, the Freedom and Liberties and economies of many other nations as well.

The only path of success for America and the rest of the world is to downsize our government and return back to smaller Constitutional government and end the current trend of out of control, ever encroaching, Constitution violating government.

First, if you care to read my last post, I never suggested that "the constitution be discarded." In fact, I believe I mentionned that our constitution was drawn with enough foresight to allow for "forward movements" and corrections to assure that it remains relevant for longer than 250 years. Amendments are the way to do it. . .but also clarification of the words of the Constitution that allows to bring vocabulary used then to today's true meaning. . .for exemple "right to bare arms" seemed pretty simple then. . . but today "arms" can be anything from knives and hand guns to grenades, bombs, and nuclear weapons. I very much doubt that our forefather truly had in mind that everyone of us (or rather. . . as they SEEMED to mean it at that time, all FREE, WHITE MEN, which very appropriately has been extended to women and any skin color) carry a small nuclear bomb in the trunk of his/her car. . .just in case!

The Bush era certainly didn't make us (or other nations) successful and free. In fact, the deregulations that took place and the over reaching into an unnecessary war made US and the rest of the world more unstable and unsafe.

No, America did not " steal all it's wealth from third world countries," it merely took it from the indigenous population and corporate America is not using and abusing the population of other countries (and our own, as so many jobs have been outsourced and lost to our citizens) to make more profits (sweat shops etc. . .).

And when you say that "No other country. . .can even come close to our success throughout history. . ." well, we are a very young country. . .and our success over the last 236 years is commendable, but certainly not comparable to the Roman Empire

Wikepedia
Depending on how you define the Roman Empire:

• The united empire lasted 426 years
• The Western Empire lasted a further 81 years, for a total of 507 years
• The Eastern Empire lasted a further 1058 years after the split, for a total of 1484 years.

which, obviously, failed in spite of its past success!

And, re: our greed for Oil. . . . we are the biggest user of Oil in the world (per capita), and the GOP REFUSES to even consider moving toward more environmentally friendly forms of energy, which other countries are clearly moving forward to. It is quite a sight to see how many solar panels have been installed on houses (some houses OLDER than America itself!) even in the two last years since my previous visit to Europe.

But, I certainly do no intend to convince you of anything. I just think it is time that someone in this forum points to the innacuracy of many of the GOP propaganda.

So. . .good luck voting for Mitt the clown, I will be very proud to vote for President Obama. In fact, this is the primary reason why I became a citizen just last March!

 

[Texas_tea]

First, if you care to read my last post, I never suggested that "the constitution be discarded."

Obviously, my misunderstanding ...

In fact, I believe I mentionned that our constitution was drawn with enough foresight to allow for "forward movements" and corrections to assure that it remains relevant for longer than 250 years. Amendments are the way to do it. . .but also clarification of the words of the Constitution that allows to bring vocabulary used then to today's true meaning. . .for exemple "right to bare arms" seemed pretty simple then. . . but today "arms" can be anything from knives and hand guns to grenades, bombs, and nuclear weapons. I very much doubt that our forefather truly had in mind that everyone of us (or rather. . . as they SEEMED to mean it at that time, all FREE, WHITE MEN, which very appropriately has been extended to women and any skin color) carry a small nuclear bomb in the trunk of his/her car. . .just in case!

I do not think anyone will logically disagree with this, with the exception of the Democrat party, who undeniably are constantly calling for more regulations or all out ending the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.

This is an example of the smaller and common sense approach to Constitutional Government I was referring to. Of course citizens do not need a nuclear bomb, but that doesn't mean we need to scrap the 2nd Amendment either.

The Bush era certainly didn't make us (or other nations) successful and free. In fact, the deregulations that took place and the over reaching into an unnecessary war made US and the rest of the world more unstable and unsafe.

I will not disagree with this statement either with the exception of an "unnecessary war". We may not have needed an all war, but it's hard to imagine not doing anything after 9/11. Obviously, the US and the rest of the world with the growing influence of the Taliban was unsafe at that time too!

No, America did not " steal all it's wealth from third world countries," it merely took it from the indigenous population and corporate America is not using and abusing the population of other countries (and our own, as so many jobs have been outsourced and lost to our citizens) to make more profits (sweat shops etc. . .)

You do realize that America has the largest corporate tax in the world. This is the primary reason so many jobs have been "outsourced" Not because of the greedy rich corporations wanting to make more profit, but because of the greedy government, who has nearly taxed and regulated them out of business and has taxed them out of this country!

And when you say that "No other country. . .can even come close to our success throughout history. . ." well, we are a very young country. . .and our success over the last 236 years is commendable, but certainly not comparable to the Roman Empire

I disagree with this one. Yes, Rome was a modern wonder but, the US has made more progress in the last 236 years than the previous 5000 years. And, also considering Rome was still throwing people to lions and sacking entire countries to enslave the people or whatever, I hardly believe that is a comparison.

America has provided more human rights, more Freedom and Liberties to mankind than any other country, at any time in the history of this planet!

But, I certainly do no intend to convince you of anything. I just think it is time that someone in this forum points to the innacuracy of many of the GOP propaganda.

So. . .good luck voting for Mitt the clown, I will be very proud to vote for President Obama. In fact, this is the primary reason why I became a citizen just last March!

Well, as I stated earlier I do not think anything will change the mind of Americans on this topic. I am not sure that the "independents", "swing vote" or "undecided" exist in the quantities the media is saying. I believe most have made up their mind one way or the other and it doesn't seem anything will change it.

But, that doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to debate or point out propaganda on both sides.

I didn't realize you recently obtained your citizenship. Congratulations!

And, finally, I am not voting for Mitt Romney nor did I vote FOR John McCain. I am simply voting against OBAMA!

 

[Cruella]

So. . .good luck voting for Mitt the clown, I will be very proud to vote for President Obama. In fact, this is the primary reason why I became a citizen just last March!

Why in the world would you want to become an American citizen?

 

[Centrehalf]

Amendments are the way to do it. . .but also clarification of the words of the Constitution that allows to bring vocabulary used then to today's true meaning. . .for exemple "right to bare arms" seemed pretty simple then. . . but today "arms" can be anything from knives and hand guns to grenades, bombs, and nuclear weapons. I very much doubt that our forefather truly had in mind that everyone of us (or rather. . . as they SEEMED to mean it at that time, all FREE, WHITE MEN, which very appropriately has been extended to women and any skin color) carry a small nuclear bomb in the trunk of his/her car. . .just in case!

I don't mean to hijack your conversation with Texas_tea, I'm enjoying following it, but this part caught my eye. I just want to try and narrow down what you think about this in order to better understand where you are coming from so I'm only going to ask about one specific weapon. Do you think an M-16 is covered by the 2nd Amendment?

 

[dogtowner]

What I have so much trouble "comprehending" is how anyone can look at our current situation and reasonably understand how and why we are in the situation and then think more government, more regulations, the forfeiting of more Freedoms and Liberties could in any way solve anything.

Government is the problem not the solution. The only solution is limited government!

got no answer for that one Tex

 

[Openmind]

Why in the world would you want to become an American citizen?

Because I have lived in America (mostly) for 41 years, my husband is American, my son and daughter are Americans, my husband was in the navy for 12 years, my son is a former Marine, I went to college in America and had a career in America. I paid taxes, bought cars, bought houses, and with my husband created a small business. The ONLY thing I couldn't do was vote. . .and I find it important to vote for President Obama.

I was born and raised in Belgium, lived in several European countries and several US States, but spend most of my life in the US. . .and yet, because of a silly piece of paper, I couldn't vote. . .and if something had happened to my husband, I would NOT have been taxed on the wealth WE (my husband and I) accumulated over the last 41 years. . .just because I didn't have that silly piece of paper making me "officially" an US Citizen.

So. . .I took care of it!

 

[Openmind]

I don't mean to hijack your conversation with Texas_tea, I'm enjoying following it, but this part caught my eye. I just want to try and narrow down what you think about this in order to better understand where you are coming from so I'm only going to ask about one specific weapon. Do you think an M-16 is covered by the 2nd Amendment?

To tell you the truth, I have only a vague idea of what a M-16 is. I hate guns, every gun. But I respect the Constitution so I accept that guns are a way of life in this country. However, I do believe that the type of weapons that are today sold to individuals go far beyond the intent of the law.
I don't think you want to get me involved in a debate about the 2nd amendment! I respect it as a law. . .as an individual, I disagree with it and I never have and NEVER will own a gun.

 

[Cruella]

. . .and if something had happened to my husband, I would NOT have been taxed on the wealth WE (my husband and I) accumulated over the last 41 years. . .just because I didn't have that silly piece of paper making me "officially" an US Citizen.

So. . .I took care of it!

Interesting. So NOW if something happens to your husband and you re-elect Obama, you will get to "gift" 55% of his share of the wealth to Obama in taxes. That's very admirable.